Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Trillboards DOOH Advertising

by com.trillboards
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_multi_touch_attribution

Get multi-touch attribution model results for a campaign.

Supported models: time_decay, position_based, attention_weighted.

WHEN TO USE:

  • Understanding how DOOH fits into the full marketing funnel

  • Seeing credit allocation across DOOH, mobile, web, and store channels

  • Quantifying DOOH's contribution to conversions

RETURNS:

  • totalChains: number of multi-touch journeys found

  • avgTouchpoints: average touchpoints per chain

  • channelAttribution: { dooh, mobile, web, store } (each 0-1, sums to 1)

  • conversions: total conversion events

  • totalConversionValue: sum of conversion values (cents)

  • avgConfidence: average match confidence across chains

Returns null if no multi-touch chains exist.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "campaign_id": "<campaign_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_multi_touch_attribution"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
campaign_idYesCampaign identifier

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure and does well: it lists return fields in detail, specifies that channelAttribution sums to 1, and handles the null-return edge case. However, it mentions supported models without indicating how a model is selected given only campaign_id in the schema, leaving a minor ambiguity.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-organized with clear headings (WHEN TO USE, RETURNS) and bulleted lists. It is front-loaded with a clear summary sentence and every line provides meaningful information without redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is remarkably complete: it explains what the tool does, when to use it, what the return object contains, and a key edge case (null response). It is more than sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already provides 100% coverage with campaign_id described as 'Campaign identifier'. The description adds no further parameter-level detail, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Get multi-touch attribution model results for a campaign' with a specific verb and resource, and lists supported models (time_decay, position_based, attention_weighted) which distinguishes it from sibling attribution tools like get_attribution_timeseries or get_campaign_attribution.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The 'WHEN TO USE' section provides clear context (understanding DOOH fit, credit allocation, quantifying DOOH contribution) but does not mention exclusions or explicitly name alternative tools for different scenarios, so it stops short of a 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Trillboards DOOH Advertising toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources